MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W40252252

Systemic absorption of topical gentamicin sinus irrigation.

2008· article· en· W40252252 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Wong, Osama Marglani, Brian D. Westerberg, Amin R. Javer

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Evidence surrounding systemic absorption of gentamicin during intraoperative irrigation of the paranasal sinuses is lacking. The objectives of this study were to determine (1) if topical gentamicin is absorbed from the paranasal sinuses, (2) if hearing loss occurs following topical administration of gentamicin, and (3) if gentamicin placed within the sinuses travels retrograde (against mucociliary clearance) up the auditory tube to the middle ear. DESIGN: Consecutive, prospective case series. SETTING: Tertiary centre. METHODS: A series of patients undergoing sinus surgery were identified. Fluorescein-stained gentamicin was used to irrigate the sinus cavities intraoperatively. Otoscopy using a filtered light source was performed 30 minutes postoperatively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Serum gentamicin levels preirrigation and at 30 minutes postirrigation and (2) change in pure-tone average and threshold at 8 kHz pre- and postoperative audiograms. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled. Serum gentamicin levels were detectable in three patients. Fluorescein irrigation solution was not visualized in the middle ear space. No significant hearing loss was observed in any of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Gentamicin may be absorbed from the nasal mucosa during intraoperative irrigation of the sinuses. However, detectable serum levels were well below therapeutic levels. The clinical significance of this finding requires further study to determine if topical sinus irrigation with gentamicin is a safe procedure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207